C vs. FORTRAN

[Walter Bays]

In article <774 at naucse.UUCP> rrr at naucse.UUCP (Bob Rose ) writes:
>Lets see malloc or alloca[1] in fortran without some low level routines
>in some other language. Also recursion, yes you can make your own stack
>but how big do you make this stack?

Most large applications I've seen on UNIX have been 99% Fortran + 1% C,
or 100% C.  Most large applications I've seen on other OS's have been
99% Fortran + 1% Assembly Language.  I don't like to read or write
Fortran, but the fact that it's inappropriate for certain low level
routines doesn't change the fact that it's appropriate for some
applications.

Perhaps Fortran would be a less viable alternative were it not for
assistance from C.  I've also seen time-critical applications that were
80% Fortran and 20% Assembler.  (Fortran didn't give enough low-level
control in the time-critical sections.)  These applications were
nightmares that locked the users into obsolete hardware and operating
systems, because the cost to convert was too high.  Though the
low-level hardware dependencies will always be difficult, 80% Fortran +
20% C is much more portable, making Fortran a safer choice for the
application.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinions are my own.  Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.
E-Mail route: ...!pyramid!garth!walter		(415) 852-2384
USPS: Intergraph APD, 2400 Geng Road, Palo Alto, California 94303
------------------------------------------------------------------------------